MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W49964765

Exploiting decomposition on constraint problems with high tree-width

2009· article· en· W49964765 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew Kitching, Fahiem Bacchus

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicConstraint Satisfaction and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDecompositionTree decompositionTree (set theory)Search treeDecomposition method (queueing theory)HeuristicConstraint (computer-aided design)Computer scienceTreewidthMathematical optimizationAlgorithmBranch and boundMathematicsTheoretical computer scienceSearch algorithmDiscrete mathematicsCombinatoricsGraphPathwidth
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Decomposition is an effective technique for solving discrete Constraint Optimization Problems (COPs) with low tree-width. On problems with high treewidth, however, existing decomposition algorithms offer little advantage over branch and bound search (B&B). In this paper we propose a method for exploiting decomposition on problems with high treewidth. Our technique involves modifying B&B to detect and exploit decomposition on a selected subset of the problem’s objectives. Decompositions over this subset, generated during search, are exploited to compute tighter bounds allowing B&B to prune more of its search space. We present a heuristic for selecting an appropriate subset of objectives—one that readily decomposes during search and yet can still provide good bounds. We demonstrate empirically that our approach can significantly improve B&B’s performance and outperform standard decomposition algorithms on a variety of high tree-width problems. 1

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.828
Threshold uncertainty score0.355

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicConstraint Satisfaction and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207